Report: Time It Takes to Find a Job is Off the Charts

[Grim17]

Chalk up another success for Obamanomics.

Report: Time It Takes to Find a Job is Off the Charts
June 08, 2011 2:24 PM

ABC News' Dan Arnall (@abcmoneyguy) reports:

We’ve seen the headline numbers from the monthly jobs report; losing a job means a long stint without employment these days. The median period of unemployment is now at a historic high; 39.7 weeks according to the May Report. That’s the highest it has ever been in the history of the survey.

A new research report from the Bureau of Labor Statistics dug into this trend to offer new details on how long it takes to make the transition from unemployed to employed and found that 11 percent of job seekers took a year or longer to land a new job. Another off-the-chart reading.

Data included in the report shows that between 2000 – 2008 about half of all unemployed people found a job within five weeks. Last year, a little more than a third of jobseekers were able to land a new position in that amount of time.

Report: Time It Takes to Find a Job is Off the Charts - The Note

Also, keep in mind that if you include all the people who have part-time jobs but want to work full-time, and people who want to work but have given up looking, the unemployment rate goes from 9.1% to a staggering 15.8%.

Exit question:
Is there anyone who still believes that the Obama administrations economic policies haven't been a failure?

.

 

[GhostlyJoe]

Chalk up another success for Obamanomics.


Report: Time It Takes to Find a Job is Off the Charts - The Note

Also, keep in mind that if you include all the people who have part-time jobs but want to work full-time, and people who want to work but have given up looking, the unemployment rate goes from 9.1% to a staggering 15.8%.

Exit question:
Is there anyone who still believes that the Obama administrations economic policies haven't been a failure?

.

Ah ... so it would seem that the unemployed are not all lazy incompetents and could use a hand up in tough economic times. Must be why conservatives like you support extending unemployment benefits.

Also, why do so many conservatives revel in bad economic news? Does it send a "tingle up your leg" when you open the paper and see a bad jobs report? Do you let loose a giddy giggle when the Dow drops 50 points?

Conservatives often cite incentives when discussing economics. It seems that poor economic news lessens Obama's chances for re-election, so conservatives interested in electing a Republican in 2012 have a mighty incentive to see the U.S. economy fail.

Now I know this is a tough question and might require some honest soul searching: Do you want to see America fail, Grim?

 

[Grim17]

Ah ... so it would seem that the unemployed are not all lazy incompetents and could use a hand up in tough economic times. Must be why conservatives like you support extending unemployment benefits.

Also, why do so many conservatives revel in bad economic news? Does it send a "tingle up your leg" when you open the paper and see a bad jobs report? Do you let loose a giddy giggle when the Dow drops 50 points?

Conservatives often cite incentives when discussing economics. It seems that poor economic news lessens Obama's chances for re-election, so conservatives interested in electing a Republican in 2012 have a mighty incentive to see the U.S. economy fail.

Now I know this is a tough question and might require some honest soul searching: Do you want to see America fail, Grim?

How about you address my question first... I know it goes against the liberal playbook, but how about you give it a try?

 

[tessaesque]

"Super fast" is 5 weeks or less? Damn.

 

[tessaesque]

Ah ... so it would seem that the unemployed are not all lazy incompetents and could use a hand up in tough economic times. Must be why conservatives like you support extending unemployment benefits.

Also, why do so many conservatives revel in bad economic news? Does it send a "tingle up your leg" when you open the paper and see a bad jobs report? Do you let loose a giddy giggle when the Dow drops 50 points?

Conservatives often cite incentives when discussing economics. It seems that poor economic news lessens Obama's chances for re-election, so conservatives interested in electing a Republican in 2012 have a mighty incentive to see the U.S. economy fail.

Now I know this is a tough question and might require some honest soul searching: Do you want to see America fail, Grim?

If I post bad economic news I'm not squirming in my seat, celebrating. Posting bad economic news isn't celebrating. It's creating awareness. If nobody said anything would that be more acceptable?

 

[GhostlyJoe]

How about you address my question first... I know it goes against the liberal playbook, but how about you give it a try?

There is no liberal playbook, Grim. To address your question, Obama's policies have seen mixed results but not "failed" by any fair measure.

Since Obama took office, the stock market has rebounded, unemployment has stabilized, the U.S. economy has seen mild but sustained growth and the U.S. auto industry has rebounded from the brink of collapse.

Here's a quick look at unemployment. Personally, I wish those numbers were better -- for the sake of my country, you know? But there's a lot more to that picture than just "Obama is bad." I find your take on it overly simplistic and fixated on partisan sniping over constructive analysis.

Now answer my question. Why do you like seeing America struggle?

 

[GhostlyJoe]

If I post bad economic news I'm not squirming in my seat, celebrating. Posting bad economic news isn't celebrating. It's creating awareness. If nobody said anything would that be more acceptable?

The OP was an attack on Obama-supporting liberals, not a thoughtful take on a tough economic picture. I responded in kind.

I don't see conservatives as a hive-mind. However, some have their hopes pinned on the economy continuing to falter, as that is their angle of attack on Obama in 2012. In your opinion, can the GOP win the White House if the economy is booming next year?

 

[tessaesque]

The OP was an attack on Obama-supporting liberals, not a thoughtful take on a tough economic picture. I responded in kind.

I don't see conservatives as a hive-mind. However, some have their hopes pinned on the economy continuing to falter, as that is their angle of attack on Obama in 2012. In your opinion, can the GOP win the White House if the economy is booming next year?

Would it not make sense to ask liberals what they think of this news, considering they would (by and large) be supportive of Obama's policies? They aren't trying to convince Conservatives not to give the guy a second term.

 

[Grim17]

Now I know this is a tough question and might require some honest soul searching: Do you want to see America fail, Grim?

When exactly, did I ever give any indication that I wanted to see America fail? Pointing out the failures of Obama's economic policies, is the only way we can ever get back on the right track, and as long as people like yourself refuse to acknowledge that his policies have in fact failed, that will never happen and America will never recover.

I do not now, nor have I ever wanted to see America fail. If that were the case, I would either make excuses for the current administrations policies like you do, or I wouldn't bother posting facts like this in the first place.

 

[GhostlyJoe]

When exactly, did I ever give any indication that I wanted to see America fail? Pointing out the failures of Obama's economic policies, is the only way we can ever get back on the right track, and as long as people like yourself refuse to acknowledge that his policies have in fact failed, that will never happen and America will never recover.

I do not now, nor have I ever wanted to see America fail. If that were the case, I would either make excuses for the current administrations policies like you do, or I wouldn't bother posting facts like this in the first place.

The OP is clearly cheerleading poor economic performance. You've isolated an aspect of unemployment that's both troubling and indicative of a tough job market and used it only to "point out the failure of Obama's policies." I can read between the lines, Grim. What's important to you isn't that we get the economy churning. What's important to you is that Obama is seen as a failure. So you isolate negative data to make blanket statements about Obama and his supporters. Good economic news does not suit that agenda, so you dismiss or ignore the positive elements of our admittedly slow reovery.

It's pretty transparent and it lays bare a simple observation about the next presidential race: The GOP can only win if the recovery fails.

 

[winston53660]

When exactly, did I ever give any indication that I wanted to see America fail? Pointing out the failures of Obama's economic policies, is the only way we can ever get back on the right track, and as long as people like yourself refuse to acknowledge that his policies have in fact failed, that will never happen and America will never recover.

I do not now, nor have I ever wanted to see America fail. If that were the case, I would either make excuses for the current administrations policies like you do, or I wouldn't bother posting facts like this in the first place.

And if a Republican were in office this situation would be different how?

 

[Grim17]

Since Obama took office, the stock market has rebounded, unemployment has stabilized, the U.S. economy has seen mild but sustained growth and the U.S. auto industry has rebounded from the brink of collapse.

Here's a quick look at unemployment. Personally, I wish those numbers were better -- for the sake of my country, you know? But there's a lot more to that picture than just "Obama is bad." I find your take on it overly simplistic and fixated on partisan sniping over constructive analysis.

Obama spent a trillion dollars of money that we didn't even have, and promised that it would fix our economy. Well, that money has now dried up and where are we? NOWHERE... That's where we are.

Instead of giving the private sector incentives to hire and grow the economy, Obama instead took the "More government" approach which gave us a temporary boost, but nothing for the future. His attacks on big business and "tax the rich" rhetoric has had a very negative effect on the private sector, which is the backbone of economic prosperity. When you couple that with his energy policies, Obamacare, EPA standards, monetizing our debt, and his attempts to prematurely transform America into a "green" nation, we are left with a country with high unemployment, rising inflation, low growth and mired in economic stagnation that shows little sign of improvement any time soon.

I realize this might be a tough pill for you to swallow, but Obama has proved once again that government spending and expansion is never the solution, but rather the root of problem itself... Something that liberals and people like yourself refuse to acknowledge, failure, after failure, after failure, after failure...

 

[Grim17]

And if a Republican were in office this situation would be different how?

We would have had pro-growth economic policies and incentives designed to jump start the private sector, combined with less government spending, interference, regulations and intervention.

In other words, the country would have already been well on it's way to economic recovery and a hell of a lot less in debt.

 

[winston53660]

We would have had pro-growth economic policies and incentives designed to jump start the private sector, combined with less government spending, interference, regulations and intervention.

In other words, the country would have already been well on it's way to economic recovery and a hell of a lot less in debt.

And these pro growth economic policies would be?

 

[toddwv]

Obama spent a trillion dollars of money that we didn't even have, and promised that it would fix our economy. Well, that money has now dried up and where are we? NOWHERE... That's where we are.

Instead of giving the private sector incentives to hire and grow the economy, Obama instead took the "More government" approach which gave us a temporary boost, but nothing for the future. His attacks on big business and "tax the rich" rhetoric has had a very negative effect on the private sector, which is the backbone of economic prosperity. When you couple that with his energy policies, Obamacare, EPA standards, and attempts to prematurely transform America into a "green" nation, we are left with a country with high unemployment, low growth and mired in economic stagnation that shows little sign of improvement any time soon.

I realize this might be a tough pill for you to swallow, but Obama has proved once again that government spending and expansion is never the solution, but rather the root of problem itself... Something that liberals and people like yourself refuse to acknowledge, failure, after failure, after failure, after failure...

It did "fix" the economy. The economy was shedding jobs at an extraordinary rate. The stock market had taken a nose-dive and unemployment skyrocketed. These are just a few of the indicators that were plunging into negative.

Fast forward. The economy has stabilized to the point where there is a net increase of jobs. These jobs are being created in the private sector even while the government (local and national) is letting tens of thousands of employees go.

I haven't looked but productivity has probably peaked by now, probably a while ago and wages are probably still stagnant even while energy and food items are costing double-digits more than they did last year.

We were told that businesses were just afraid to hire because, even while they were shelling out record amounts for executive wages and executive benefits, they were just so uncertain about rather their taxes were going to be raised. That has proven to be a hoax.

Now we're supposed to believe that businesses are afraid because "Obamacare" is scaring them. Meanwhile their profits soar.

So at what point does the "rest" of America wake up and realize that as long as they can pay some kid $2.00 a day to work in a factory someday yet still call themselves an "American" company while they pay a team of accountants to "offshore" their money from the RECORD profits that they are making, JOBS WILL NOT RETURN. It's that simple.

It doesn't matter if we cut their taxes to nothing (which many companies are paying now), as long as we forget that we are the largest single nation economy in the world and allow these "American" multinats to rake in profits, we might as well get used to an economy that makes a ton of money for the corporations while the rest of us, small businesses included, can barely scrape by.

 

[Grim17]

And these pro growth economic policies would be?

Either ask somebody who hasn't had this very same discussion more times than they can count, or discover the wonderful world of Google and educate yourself. As for me, I've had it with trying to talk to people who are incapable of acknowledging anything that doesn't fit with their political beliefs.

 

[winston53660]

Either ask somebody who hasn't had this very same discussion more times than they can count, or discover the wonderful world of Google and educate yourself. As for me, I've had it with trying to talk to people who are incapable of acknowledging anything that doesn't fit with their political beliefs.

1) I don't have political beliefs.

2) obviously about all you have is platitudes of rhetoric with no sustenance.

 

[Grim17]

It did "fix" the economy. The economy was shedding jobs at an extraordinary rate. The stock market had taken a nose-dive and unemployment skyrocketed. These are just a few of the indicators that were plunging into negative.

Fast forward. The economy has stabilized to the point where there is a net increase of jobs. These jobs are being created in the private sector even while the government (local and national) is letting tens of thousands of employees go.

I haven't looked but productivity has probably peaked by now, probably a while ago and wages are probably still stagnant even while energy and food items are costing double-digits more than they did last year.

We were told that businesses were just afraid to hire because, even while they were shelling out record amounts for executive wages and executive benefits, they were just so uncertain about rather their taxes were going to be raised. That has proven to be a hoax.

Now we're supposed to believe that businesses are afraid because "Obamacare" is scaring them. Meanwhile their profits soar.

So at what point does the "rest" of America wake up and realize that as long as they can pay some kid $2.00 a day to work in a factory someday yet still call themselves an "American" company while they pay a team of accountants to "offshore" their money from the RECORD profits that they are making, JOBS WILL NOT RETURN. It's that simple.

It doesn't matter if we cut their taxes to nothing (which many companies are paying now), as long as we forget that we are the largest single nation economy in the world and allow these "American" multinats to rake in profits, we might as well get used to an economy that makes a ton of money for the corporations while the rest of us, small businesses included, can barely scrape by.

So what you are saying is, Obama's policies didn't work because America is doomed.

So why is it that people like yourself will continue supporting Obama, instead of giving someone else with a different approch a chance? I mean, if we suck as badly as you seem to believe we do, what have you got to lose?

 

[Grim17]

1) I don't have political beliefs.

Which explains why you are a member and frequent contributor to this POLITICAL DISCUSSION FORUM.

2) obviously about all you have is platitudes of rhetoric with no sustenance.

Go back to post #1... There's your substance... It's called "the results of failed economic policies".

 

[Aunt Spiker]

Chalk up another success for Obamanomics.


Report: Time It Takes to Find a Job is Off the Charts - The Note

Also, keep in mind that if you include all the people who have part-time jobs but want to work full-time, and people who want to work but have given up looking, the unemployment rate goes from 9.1% to a staggering 15.8%.

Exit question:
Is there anyone who still believes that the Obama administrations economic policies haven't been a failure?

.

I don't believe that any president has the actual power to make or break such situations when they happen. They can try to deal with it and improve things but the president isn't some power-holding creature of awesomeness no matter how partisan we try to hack the pie.

Possibly more concerning is the issue of those folks who just give up their search, frustrated by the lack of available positions. The report shows the average respondent who gave up did so after about 20 weeks of job hunting in 2010.

And I'm sure it's tough to look look look: but dayum - people just stop? Geesh man. On whose dime? If they're on unemployment just sitting around and not searching at all shouldn't be an option.

 

[toddwv]

So what you are saying is, Obama's policies didn't work because America is doomed.

No, that's not what I'm saying. Unfortunately, there's not enough space and I don't have enough time to fill out my posts to the point where you won't drag a straw man kicking and screaming out of my posts to burn it on a stake so the question is why should I even bother?

Here allow me to simplify my points so that those who lack basic reading comprehension can find them even easier to ignore:

• Obama's policies did exactly what they were supposed to have done but there needs to be more done.
• Tax cuts for anybody but lower and middle class at this point would be not just fruitless but potentially detrimental. It hasn't worked for the past 10 years, there's no reason to expect that it will work now.
• America needs to remember that it is a major economic power and act like it.

Is that simple enough? I can remove all the words over two syllables if that would help.

So why is it that people like yourself will continue supporting Obama, instead of giving someone else with a different approch a chance? I mean, if we suck as badly as you seem to believe we do, what have you got to lose?

Who has this "different approach"? It's just more of the same old same old from the right that got us into this huge downturn in the first place. Why don't we try something "new" and return to the policies that we know will work?

Toss Reaganomics and the right-wing's "Starve the Beast" approach out with the dirty bathwater and run a new tub of fresh, clean water.

 

[tessaesque]

No, that's not what I'm saying. Unfortunately, there's not enough space and I don't have enough time to fill out my posts to the point where you won't drag a straw man kicking and screaming out of my posts to burn it on a stake so the question is why should I even bother?

Here allow me to simplify my points so that those who lack basic reading comprehension can find them even easier to ignore:

• 
  [*]Obama's policies did exactly what they were supposed to have done but there needs to be more done.
• Tax cuts for anybody but lower and middle class at this point would be not just fruitless but potentially detrimental. It hasn't worked for the past 10 years, there's no reason to expect that it will work now.
• America needs to remember that it is a major economic power and act like it.

Is that simple enough? I can remove all the words over two syllables if that would help.



Who has this "different approach"? It's just more of the same old same old from the right that got us into this huge downturn in the first place. Why don't we try something "new" and return to the policies that we know will work?

Toss Reaganomics and the right-wing's "Starve the Beast" approach out with the dirty bathwater and run a new tub of fresh, clean water.

Almost everything Obama said wouldn't or would happen as a result of his policies has or hasn't, depending on the event. Unemployment went higher than was expected, fewer jobs were "saved or created" most "new" jobs were government positions, payback on loans has been shakey, and largely skewed...and we added $4 trillion in debt in 2.5 years. Was that how it was supposed to work?

 

[Grim17]

Almost everything Obama said wouldn't or would happen as a result of his policies has or hasn't, depending on the event. Unemployment went higher than was expected, fewer jobs were "saved or created" most "new" jobs were government positions, payback on loans has been shakey, and largely skewed...and we added $4 trillion in debt in 2.5 years. Was that how it was supposed to work?

What people don't understand, is if all that would have at least laid a foundation for solid economic growth in the very near future, it wouldn't have been so bad... But the fact is, it did no such thing. His policies have now proven themselves to be failed.

 

[pbrauer]

Exit question:
Is there anyone who still believes that the Obama administrations economic policies haven't been a failure?

.

I have a better question: Is there anyone who doesn't believe the policies of the Bush administration are the reason for this Great recession?

 

[Whovian]

Since Obama took office... unemployment has stabilized...

Really? You call going from 7.6% when Obama took office to 9.1% 'stabalized?